Andy,
I would kindly ask you not to provide opinions while stating yourself as a board member. I feel that it implies an official position for the group that your position on the board does not provide.
Additionally, your sudden opinion runs contrary to what has been stated on record without objection.
Any court would take that record into account.
I personally do not recognis a lame duck ED. It's my personal opion as a member, and it's one that I will stand by.
Jeffrey
----- Original message -----
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:08:53PM -0800, Ever Falling wrote:
> > and if we fail to consense
> [snip 208 words of borrowing trouble]
>> Another one of the old founding phrases of Noisebridge is applicable
> here: Try not to solve problems before they occur.
>> As it stands, AFAIK we have a lame-duck executive director; if we need
> anything done by the ED, Jake can do it as necessary until replaced by
> the board. If the membership decides to appoint a new ED, the board
> will obviously rubber-stamp that decision (it's our primary purpose as
> the board -- to rubber-stamp the decisions of the membership).
>> I certainly don't know for sure, because I'm not a judge or even a
> lawyer, but I suspect that if the matter ever did enter a legal forum,
> the ambiguity in the bylaws would lead the judge to decide that the
> executive director serves until replaced; as a corporation, we can't
> exist without an ED. (Imagine trying to change your legal name and
> losing the paperwork halfway through. The courts obviously wouldn't
> decide that you had no name, they'd just prolong the old one until the
> paperwork was completed.)
>> The board should have appointed a new ED after the previous one year
> term expired, but our failure as a board to do our job shouldn't prevent
> the ED from doing his in the best interests of the community.
>> (Yes, I'm aware that there are differing opinions amongst various
> members as to how to resolve the ambiguity in the bylaws. I'm simply
> stating my opinion and what I think it's most likely a court would
> decide if it were to get to that point.)
>> -andy
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss